Paid in full written on a check

[hvnbnd4]

I had an outstanding $600+ bill with a family law lawyer. I paid it off to $300. On the check I wrote to her, I put paid in full on the memo and also where she endorsed it. She cashed this check. She is now saying that I still owe her even tho, I did this and she cashed it. I was not satisfied with her total services, and felt that what I had already paid, way over $3000, was sufficiant for her services. Since she cashed this check, am I still liable for the balance, as she states? She says she is going to take legal action against me to collect the balance due. Thanks GR

 

[cbg]

I am not a lawyer, and this is not my area of expertise. But common sense would indicate that if your writing Paid In Full on a check obligated her to accept that as full payment, anyone could write a check for one cent, write Paid In Full on the check, and avoid paying more than one cent for their mortgage, their phone bill, their car payment etc.

If you owed her $600, then writing Paid In Full on your check for $300 does not excuse you from paying the other $300, whether she endorsed and deposited the check or not.

 

[NYClex]

This is the law:

3-311. ACCORD AND SATISFACTION BY USE OF INSTRUMENT

(a) If a person against whom a claim is asserted proves that (i) that person in good faith tendered an instrument to the claimant as full satisfaction of the claim, (ii) the amount of the claim was unliquidated or subject to a bona fide dispute, and (iii) the claimant obtained payment of the instrument, the following subsections apply.

(b) Unless subsection (c) applies, the claim is discharged if the person against whom the claim is asserted proves that the instrument or an accompanying written communication contained a conspicuous statement to the effect that the instrument was tendered as full satisfaction of the claim.

(c) Subject to subsection (d), a claim is not discharged under subsection (b) if either of the following applies:

(1) The claimant, if an organization, proves that (i) within a reasonable time before the tender, the claimant sent a conspicuous statement to the person against whom the claim is asserted that communications concerning disputed debts, including an instrument tendered as full satisfaction of a debt, are to be sent to a designated person, office, or place, and (ii) the instrument or accompanying communication was not received by that designated person, office, or place.

(2) The claimant, whether or not an organization, proves that within 90 days after payment of the instrument, the claimant tendered repayment of the amount of the instrument to the person against whom the claim is asserted. This paragraph does not apply if the claimant is an organization that sent a statement complying with paragraph (1)(i).

(d) A claim is discharged if the person against whom the claim is asserted proves that within a reasonable time before collection of the instrument was initiated, the claimant, or an agent of the claimant having direct responsibility with respect to the disputed obligation, knew that the instrument was tendered in full satisfaction of the claim.

UCC § 3-311


Under contract law an accord and satisfaction requires a bona fide dispute about a debt to be valid:

Examples:
1)
I had my car repaired for the stated price of $ 1000, with a $ 500 down payment and two upcoming rates of $ 250 each. The repair has been done, I never complained or showed any dissatisfaction. On my first $ 250 check I write "payment in full" and I never send a second check. The first check is cashed.

Probably I am still liable for the other $ 250. Reason: There was no bona fide dispute about the price. The repairr cost $ 1000 and I had agreed to that.

2)
I contract with Mow Joe that he will mow my lawn once a week for 10 weeks for $ 200, that is $ 20 for each week. The first eight weeks he is doing a pretty good job. The last two weeks he became sloppy, leaving patches of my lawn unmown. I advise him that I consider his work not satisfying and that I will not pay full price for the last two weeks. He insists on full payment of $ 200.

Again, with an explanatory letter why I find the work not satisfying, I send him a check for $ 180, telling him I will only pay $ 10 for the last two weeks. On the check I wrote "Payment in full". MowJoe accepts and cashes the check.

This probably would be an accord and satisfaction, because there was a bona fide dispute about the bill.

So, if there was a bona fide dispute between the client and the attorney it might very well have been a valid accord and satisfaction. Of course, without the exact details of the case one cannot make an evaluation here. So you need to have the case reviewed by a legal professional and cannot rely on this posting!